Senate OKs bill to expand U.S. antiterror spying powers (drops effort to extend Patriot Act)

New York Times ^ | 05-09-03

[Brian S]

WASHINGTON - Senate Republicans backed down Thursday from an effort to make permanent the Patriot Act's sweeping antiterrorism powers, clearing the way for passage of a less divisive measure that would still expand the government's ability to spy on foreign terrorist suspects in the United States.

In an agreement finalized over the last week, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, dropped his effort to extend provisions of the Patriot Act whose broad powers to investigate and track terrorist suspects were scheduled to expire in 2005.

As a result, the Senate voted 90-4 to approve a measure expanding the government's ability to use secret surveillance tools against terrorist suspects who are not thought to be members of known terrorist groups.

Under current law, federal officials are not allowed to seek secret surveillance warrants against noncitizens unless the officials can establish that they are linked to a known terrorist group.

The day's developments represented a key test of the balancing act between fighting terrorism and protecting civil liberties, and the result delivered a mixed verdict as many lawmakers expressed reservations about giving law enforcement too much power to fight terrorism.

"There's a delicate balance between liberty and security," said Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), an author of the so-called "lone wolf" counterterrorism measure. "It's a see-saw, and that's the debate that we're seeing now in Congress."

The law, co-sponsored by Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), is backed by the Justice Department. Its fate in the House is uncertain.

"We'll wait to take a look at the Senate bill and see what we're going to do," said a senior Republican aide in the House.

The Senate bill's supporters sought to fix problems that arose in the case of Zacarias Moussaoui, a member of al-Qaida jailed on immigration charges in the summer of 2001 after taking flight classes in the Minneapolis area.

Law enforcement officials have maintained that the FBI's inability to show conclusively that Moussaoui was linked to al-Qaida or a known terrorist group - as the current law for foreign intelligence surveillance requires - prevented them from securing a warrant against him.

[poet]

Does this include Section 802 which had NO 4 year life-span as did the rest of the obscene act when it was originally passed?
IMO, this section is dangerous as respects our freedoms and liberties AND privacy.

[mabelkitty]

In my opinion, this give the Department of Justice powers to root out traitors and how they get their money - like Scott Ritter.

[Blood of Tyrants]

the Senate voted 90-4 to approve a measure expanding the government's ability to use secret surveillance tools against terrorist suspects who are not thought to be members of known terrorist groups.

So what about this? For some unknown reason a person is labeled a "terrorist suspect" but they are not thoght to be members of any terrorist organization.

What this REALLY meas is that the government can label virtually anyone a terrorist and use "secret surveillance tools" (code words for searching your house and papers and computer without having to present a search warrant) for virtually any reason.

Do you think that hillary would kesitate for an instant to use this law against political enemies, leaders in conservative organizations, Second Amendment supporters, or just anyone she didn't like?

[mrsmith]

Sen. Kyl: "There has been a worry on the part of some that this expands the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to private American citizens. I make it crystal clear that is not true.
By definition, we could not do that. This is a law that is only justified because it relates to international terrorism. So if you come here from a foreign country, you are a non-U.S. person, you come from a foreign country, intending to do harm to Americans, as part of this international movement, whether you are a member of some specific organization or not, the act will be allowed to be used to determine whether we should take further action against you.
It is not pertaining to U.S. citizens; it is only to non-U.S. citizens and only in this particular context.
Second, you cannot just do this willy-nilly. Like every other warrant, whether under FISA or not, we have to have probable cause. That requirement is not changed one iota. If anyone suggests there is anything improper, certainly it is not unconstitutional, but to the extent anyone suggests that we are ready to recite the reasons why, that is not true. "

[serinde]

"It is not pertaining to U.S. citizens; it is only to non-U.S. citizens and only in this particular context."

EXACTLY the same thing was said about The Patriot Act. And at least two Americans have been jailed under that.

Any law of this nature needs much more oversight to prevent abuses in the future than the legislators have seen the need for. Esp. those legislators that believe that lying to Americans is fine and dandy.

[mrsmith]

No, "exactly the same thing" was not said about the Patriot Act.
Much of the Patriot Act explicitly includes citizens and resident aliens.

When you can name any citizen jailed under terms of the Patriot Act that were said to not apply to citizens- please do so. LOL!